Fuck, you are absolutely right, I went to google and this is what I found when I search for "removeyourcontent scam" in FIRST PLACE in Google:

http://removeyourcontentsucks.blogspot.com/

You post URLS "admiral" ? Ok, then I can post URLs too... otherwise remove both, admin.

Pretty interesting story.

If only 1 percent of what that page says is TRUE, I guess this guy ERIC will have some serious LEGAL issues very soon. Probably sending him directly to prison for years. I will really laugh at that.

And probably more than 1% of what that page states is TRUE.

I'm sure he cant sleep at night, he's losing hair and will get sick very soon, due of the stress to manage this "dirty" and "hidden" model.

Or, everyone notes that the RIAA and MPAA haven't managed any successful action against these people, and as they have about 3409823094832094832094823 times more money and resource, it's unlikely some porn people will manage to win jack.

HAHAHAHAH!

I always suspected that little yob of being shady.

Exactly. This is the problem. Most people involved are real dweeb collectors. They don't even WATCH what they have, the goal is just to get EVERY lossless Green Day album, or EVERY 1080P episode of star trek TNG, or whatever. They just want to own it, or be the person that has it all, they don't care about money. Shut down the commercial ones, and then everyone goes back to usenet, or IRC, or private FTP or places that public trackers can't even find.

That would be considered an anti-piracy success. Usnet, IRC and private FTP sites aren't going to take up the first 50 pages on Google when you search for any movie title.

The goal of fighting piracy is not to stop it 100%, it's all about managing it. As long as it is either technically too hard or too inconvenient for the average Joe, you are managing piracy.

I made a post about the Xbox recently and that's a perfect example. You can crack open your Xbox and add a chip, then run pirated games after some additional steps, but it's beyond what the average Joe is capable of doing, so piracy among console games is managed pretty well when you compare it to other forms of media.

You'll always have your "collectors" and techie types who will share no matter how hard it is. The goal is to make it so the average Joe thinks it's not worth the effort.

The goal *should* be to make the product available how the punters want it, at a price they are prepared to pay.

Look at music and movies. They did what you are doing. Trying to fight a battle you can't win. Then they changed tack, and iTunes came out. Offering people music at a reasonable price that was REALLY easy to get. One click. Done. The experience was BETTER than piracy. So it succeeded. Now look at movies. Same thing. Netflix came about offering a BETTER experience at a reasonable price. Huge success now. Many camps are saying netflix is solely responsible for a reduction in p2p traffic on US ISPs. How about games? Look at Steam and the success they are getting. Same point. Better experience.

I'd suggest the time and effort and money spent trying to fight a battle you admit you can't win would be better spent trying to create a better mousetrap. After all, it has worked for movies and music.

So you are saying there is no piracy in the music, movie or PC gaming market because those industries have adapted and given the (ex) pirates what they want and now they don't pirate anything anymore?

iTunes solved music piracy? Netflix solved movie pirating?

Netflix is a success because it gave paying consumers a better experience, not because it attracted all the ex-pirates. Netflix stole customers from Blockbuster, not The Pirate Bay. iTunes worked because of genius marketing and it's integration with the iPod and other Apple products, not because they attracted all the music pirates. iTunes stole customers from record stores and Best Buy, not from pirate sites.

I agree that media companies have to adapt, but you are rewriting history a little bit with that last post.

Personally, I could care less either way. I got into adult when piracy was pretty much peaked so I have no fond memories of the "golden age" so never really lost money because of piracy. But you have to be honest and accurate when framing the piracy debate and that's the only reason I replied to your post.

So many hentai and gaming producers in Japan are on the verge of extinction due to piracy...I dont think they've solved anything except how to microwave ramen at the office.

What is the sound of a pirate crying when there's nothing left to steal?

No. But thanks for the lovely straw man. I am saying those industries have managed to offer people that were stealing content a better alternative that is inexpensive and offers a much better experience.

citations: http://torrentfreak.com/netflix-is-k...the-us-110427/

I think we should build a better product, price it affordably, and make it painstakingly easy to use.

What do you think we should do?

personally i love the flip flop

he goes from saying that

to rejecting your solution because it doesn't do a perfect job of stopping piracy

I'd learn the difference between slander and libel if I were you, love.

And then learn that what I posted here was neither of those things.

/me pats your head

That wasn't in reference to your post. It''s funny how everyone keeps posting the same blogs when nobody knows the facts. I posted that link which shows the facts and how the bloggers were sued and injunction was granted on our behalf.

from what I know you have quite a large client base, and evryone of them are happy using your services.

ignore Lamis, hes eventually gonna get banned from this forum sooner or later, hes just bitter.

Im sure he will come back with some remark about me now.

:pimp

OIC.

Well on the internet, when you quote someone, and then reply with a URL it's common to assume that url is for you to look at.

Maybe in the future, if you aren't talking to me specifically, you could stop quoting me at the top of your posts to avoid confusion.

kthxbye

(I'd still swop out the URL for libel.html because, as I hope you've looked up by now, slander is spoken, and libel is written.)

I never flip flopped. I questioned the notion put forward by DamianJ that Nefllix has succeeded because it gave former pirates what they wanted and converted them into paying customers. Ask any stock analyst who follows Neflix as a company and they will tell you that Netflix has succeeded by taking all of the customers away from Blockbuster Video and other brick and mortar rental stores, not because they converted pirates into paying customers.

Netflix and iTunes have had a negligible impact on piracy, that was my point and that's why I questioned whether or not those two companies "fixed" piracy as was claimed in the original post.

Hey shit for brains,

Great link you just posted there. The cocksucker who owns that blog is advising people where to get hosting that ignores any and all DMCA take down notices.

Very reputable source you just referenced there :1orglaugh

I don't know you from Adam, but if you're going to attack the anti piracy guy, see if you can't find yourself a source that doesn't smell like freshly excreted shit.

.

Thats the way it was a couple years ago but since cash hosters like Filesonic & Oron started paying the uploaders as affiliates it created thousands of posters that have no real interest in what they are uploading except how many downloads or premium accounts they can get from it.

re read his post he never said it "fixed" piracy just that it was more effective then trying to fight it by suing users.



suing users got MORE people pirating shit, in part because many people saw piracy as a way to protest the violation of fair use

did netflix take people who were pirating movies because they wanted it to be free, no

but those people who were using torrents for fair use purposes were given a cheap alternative to dealing with much slower torrents.

if you used torrents like a vcr you could replace it with netflix and get better then ppv movies on subscription for 9.95/ month.

drop your rogers subscription down and you could save a lot of money.

Are you basing this on anything you can put a citation to, as I did my proposition? Or are you just talking out of your arse?

You posted an article from Torrent Freak which implies that Netflix is turning torrent downloaders into paying customers yet makes no citations and presents no proof other than the fact that they say so.

You're the one trying to make the argument that Netflix is gaining a majority of it's customers at the expense of piracy, yet you still haven't posted proof. The burden is on you to prove it. Here is a business article that shows that Netflix succeeded at the expense of Blockbuster, which is what I have been saying all along. Show me an objective business related article that says Netflix has succeeded because it turned pirates into paying subscribers and we can go from there. But until then you have yet to show proof other than a biased Torrent Freak article which implies what you are trying to prove.

http://www.businessinsider.com/how-n...graphic-2011-3

Also, Torrent Freak is not an objective news source you can use to support your argument. It's like citing a Wall Street Journal Op-Ed piece to support your political position. You can use biased source material to help you explain your argument, but not to prove it. Second, Torrent Freak uses the same spin that Gideon uses all the time, and that's to try to prove that piracy only causes harm when you try to fight it, if you just leave it alone, it will all work out. Teenagers use this tactic with their parents all the time. When they get caught doing something they shouldn't they argue that the problem isn't the problem, it's the parents response that's the problem.

Once again, I agree that businesses needs to adapt to give customers an alternative, but you have to be honest when arguing what works and what doesn't. And you and Gideon have not been honest when citing the examples in this thread. Which is silly when you guys could still make your argument without stretching the truth and rewriting history to fit your position.

Netflix streaming is a good example of giving paying customers what they want, but it's not a good example when it comes to turning pirates into paying customers, which is what you were trying to say.

But I think I've said all I can in this thread so I'm not going to post anymore. Personally, I have nothing against pro piracy types like Gideon, so debates like this aren't personal for me like they are for some who lose their tempers. All I ask is that people remain objective if they want to have a real debate and discussion.

the article you used didn't prove the point you were making either

and the article was also an oppinion piece, a description of what the author believed was the death of blockbuster.


if all you have to do is leave it alone and it will cause no harm, i would not be teaching people how to exploit the medium.

You have to do something, the difference is instead of fighting the fair use rights created by the new technology i show people how to embrace them.



again not what he is saying at all, he said it was better then sueing customers



i am not pro piracy i am pro fair use i have never defended piracy i have only defended fair use and the right of privacy.

secondly you misquoted an article which was nothing but the opinion of the author to prove your point.

Even the author didn't make the point you said he did

Gideon, you make some clever arguments and I enjoy reading your legal gymnastics, but you are jeopardizing your credibility on this one. Do you really want to take the position that there is no correlation between the fall of Blockbuster video and the rise of Netflix? It's pretty much undisputed at this point.

Also, you are now walking back your claim and just saying that what Netflix is doing is only "better" than suing file sharers. But you have already claimed that suing uploaders has achieved nothing. So by your own logic that means Neflix is essentially "better than nothing" in regards to stopping piracy. So by your own frame of reference, you've minimized your own claim regarding the impact of Netflix on piracy.

The bottom line is that Netflix has nothing to do with the debate on piracy. Netflix is a success story and should be studied, but it's a traditional success story about how one company defeated another by offering the same customer a better alternative.

OK man, thanks for saying so.

PS here are LOTS of other sources saying what I am saying, not just torrent freak.

http://www.google.co.uk/search?clien...A4yFhQelt7HsDQ

HTH you wrap your head around this tricky idea!

Excellent posts mynameisjim...

Isn't anyone tired of gideon and his buddies advocating the theft model as legit? Now we have them in the Q&A section for advice on how to sell stolen content? Wtf? Where is the line? Its amusing for a few minutes then grows tiresome fast.

I know of some of eric clients...They are neither dimwitted or new and make more in a month than most of us will make in a lifetime. You dont get that way being stoooopid.

You do realize that most of those search results simply reference back to your original article. Others actually question your own position and show that P2P traffic has increased. Did you actually bother reading any of those or did you post the search results and assumed I wouldn't read them?

Not to mention that Google is a search engine, not a "verification" engine. If you type in a search string it will find those terms on a page. It doesn't mean the phrase you searched for is factually correct. If I type in the search string "Facebook owned by the CIA" it will show pages of results with that in the title, that doesn't mean my original search query is correct and therefore the CIA must own Facebook. If you want me to teach you how search engines work, we can start a new thread for that.

Interesting OP. I'm not sure if your niche, is also my niche and we're talking about the same thing but there are a group of producers and website owners in the tranny niche working fairly closely together to try and track down and share where our content is, which does save time and effort.

For my company, I don't think we are winning the war on piracy but we are limiting the damage. Our strategy is:

1. Have a full time DMCA'er working exclusively for us (he does a few other roles also) constantly looking for new links to report and new sites with those links.
2. We work with Pornguardian.com to send the DMCA's and track the links, this saves the DMCA agent a lot of time so he can look for more links.
3. Ask our members to report any links they see. It doesn't bring in a lot of links but does sometimes help us find new pages, forums, especially in other languages - we have a report direct page at: http://www.grooby.com/piracy/ linked to every page.
4. If we find blogs or sites, then DMCA the hosts as well as the sites - we've had a lot of success in approaching hosts directly who will close down sites.
5. DMCA the payment processers. Paypal has closed accounts when properly DMCA'd as in their AUP. Become as much of a pain in the arse to these pirates as you can.
6. Tracking individuals. We've had some success on this but most are in unreachable places. We're just waiting for the day to track down someone uploading from the USA and that day is coming up fast.

All of our content is exclusive and a lot of it is completely different from tranny content available elsewhere, so by managing to keep as much of it off the boards, blogs as possible I feel that we are limiting the amunt of damage that can be done. Our sales and rebills are still very strong and although levelled off and we don't have the growth we used to, we seem to be in a better position than many companies.

When new technology and/or laws arrive, I hope to be in a position to use them.

Most, yes, but not all.

Here's one from WIRED, I assume you are cool with that as a source? I'll post a picture too as you're clearly struggling with this very simple point:

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/ep...PM-660x512.png

"Netflix users make up 22.2 percent of all American broadband traffic, edging out BitTorrent's 21.6 percent. At times, Netflix's traffic share rises to 30 percent."
http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2011/05/netflix-traffic/

It's OK you are just talking out of your arse, you are more than welcome to do that. I would defend to the DEATH your right to spout your opinion as if it were fact.

But when you want to talk with the grownups, just get some citations to back up your case, then we can carry on.

So your big "proof" is that P2P traffic dropped a whopping 0.4%.

Is that really the number you want to hang your argument on?

Netflix takes up nearly 50% of internet traffic and P2P traffic usage drops only 0.4%. How can you possibly claim that Netflix is hurting piracy based on that?

What you posted simply proves my point. Despite Netflix being hugely successful among paying customers, in that same time there has been less than a 1% change in P2P traffic.

Not to mention that's only P2P traffic. For someone as versed as yourself in piracy, you have to understand that file locker type sites are becoming more and more popular for sharing content and those don't show up as P2P traffic. I'm sure the increase in those sites more than makes up for the 0.4% decline in P2P traffic.

But you seem to be getting angry and frustrated since you are resorting to petty insults and sarcasm instead of sticking to the facts. I'm happy to debate real issues, but I don't have time to waste with personal insults back and forth on a message board.

Didn't you say that before?

Look, kid, if you can't find something to back your argument, that's cool. Clearly it is frustrating you, you shouldn't let it. LOADS of people create personal truths based on absolutely nothing. You carry on thinking that netflix didn't stop a single person pirating anything if you like with their better service and instant streaming and fair price. It's kind of a Paul Markham school of making opinions, but if it works for you, then groovy!

You have yourself a splendiferous day, my friend.

do you realize how insanely stupid this arguement is

it must be 100% associated because you can't claim that it 0% associated

of course there is a correlation between the success of netflix and the fall of blockbuster

but it has more to do with their failure to adapt (do you remember blockbusters subscription model, it was more expensive, and gave you less choice)

the correlation is the same correlation between the home viewing market for porn (with the vcr) and the xxx movie theaters.


reread what i said suing uploaders has done WORSE than nothing, it actually increased the amount of P2P traffic

so no i am not minimizing my claim one bit

Netflix success over came the negative position of suing AND THEN SOME

and if you truely understood how to deal with fair use you would not say that at all

netflix success is bumbling into the partial solution

going from +30% per year GROWTH to even a small DROP is a huge change.

you mean BROWSER BASED file delivery
which would show up as web browsing in the stats given
oh wait that dropping too


seriously you presented an opinion piece that completely ignored the fact that blockbusters subscription model was crap when compared to netflix as proof

you bring up file lockers as the true loss in p2p traffic when they are covered in web browsing

you argue that because there is tangent relationship bwtween blockbuster failure and netflix success that there 100% association.

Is that the facts your talking about.

Fucking thieves trying to justify content theft and redefine the arguments.

All they need to do is admit they don't support the illegal activities of stealing other peoples' private intellectual property; and, file-shares that do should be punished and shut down.

Otherwise, they are just fucking thieves.

copyright infringement is not theft it a fraud

secondly fair use authorizes all the filesharing business your complaining about

supporting the fair use rights and you never have a problem with piracy

Very good read actually... nice one.

My dear friend, don't worry, this FUCKER son of a bitch called "ERIC" can't even touch you, ever.. Don't worry.. you are free to say whatever you want whenever you want about him, and he cannot touch you, ever.. Promise. Don't be afraid by his THREATS.

In fact, what all these sites say, is pretty real.. so.. The touched one, is going to be him.

Dont worry about this TEXAN CONSERVATIVE NAZI, he will fall soon or late, when the government start investigating his dirty ass. Reports about him are being sent to the authorities and he will get in serious trouble very soon.

I recommend this fucker to keep paying his TAXES, if he doesn't want to face jail time like wesley snipes.

I SUGGEST TO ANYONE here to stop doing business with this guy called ERIC, if you don't want to get in trouble.. If you want to keep doing business with this loser called ERIC, then don't whine later when you are involved in his shitty "business".

Here are some good reads:

http://removeyourcontentsucks.blogspot.com/

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...pre ss.com%2F

You are full of shit, ERIC... take that up your ass, ASSHOLE! :1orglaugh

You will pay soon or late.. and not with money only.. with your virgin ass in prison, FUCKER.

As we can see, you are doing lots of money with all this PIRACY ISSUE, ERIC... YES THATS RIGHT, Conservative Republican Texan.

Difamate your mom, loser. :1orglaugh

And no, im not going to get in touch with you EVER, do you understand me, you son of a fucking bitch? Is that clear to you? Or do you want me to repeat that face to face? bye motherfucker.

Gideon, I'll debate with you since at least you can remain civil and mature unlike DamianJ who resorts to childish insults as soon as his position is questioned.

But you are guilty of the same thing you are accusing me of. You say I am trying to draw a correlation and calling it fact, yet you are doing the exact same thing, just using a different source.

But how about this? For the sake of argument I will concede that Wired is the ultimate source material on the matter. But right under the article you are citing is a related article by Wired that is titled:

Is Netflix Reducing Illicit File Sharing? Depends on Which Stats You Believe

So according to your very own source, the debate on whether or not Netflix has had an impact on piracy is inconclusive at best. It also speaks to my other point that P2P is simply falling in popularity as the main file sharing vehicle and other methods are gaining like file lockers.

So Gideon, if your own source material calls your argument "inconclusive" do you really want to continue pinning your whole debate on it?

ummm, LOL

yup... BU BYE MOTHERFUCKER!

did you even read the article or are you going just by the title

the negative response completely excluded the dip that happened in DJ graph

exclude the shift from positive growth to a decline and of course the research is inconclusive (remember the -.04% you were harping on)

except that conclusion is absolutely false and unsupported by the numbers
web browsing would include all FILE LOCKER transfering and that catagory is going down too

btw the debate is which is better fight or adapt

and given the fact that the fight model only increased filesharing
and adapt has caused a drop (whichyour current counter arguement ignored )